Dave...not wise typically. The rates for singles and married-filing-separately are more onerous than married-filing-jointly. I couldn't agree more that the difference between the two thresholds is strangely close, but take a look at the rate structure. If you have two marrieds making $199K each, and they file single or MFS, the tax is much higher than $398K MFJ.

These guys, while incessantly obtrusive, have already factored in this potential, which is why the thresholds are close.

TonyWynn...not exactly correct. Assuming a married couple, you will pay the 3.8% on the LESSER of your net investment income (also referred to as 'unearned income') or the excess over $250K. While this can be significant for many, the greater complexity comes as income moves north.

There are three different threshold levels affecting upper incomers: the $250K net investment tax, the $350K level initiates the loss of a portion of your itemized deductions and personal exemptions (also called the "PEASE" and "PEP" limitations), and finally, at $450K, we see the entrance of the new 39.6% tax rate.

Bottom line, while the 3.8% tax is getting most of the media play, these other levels will have a significant impact to upper incomers.

Gordon...you need to move to a socialist country. The essence of the U.S. is capitalism; why you would want to wreck that is beyond the pale.

As far as our debt situation, no, it is not because of the energy companies. You need only look one place...D.C. We are a polarized nation politically, and that has created a great deal of pain economically.

ATrautmann...only time will tell the direction of commodity pricing, and while I think you're right about oil in the short-term, I don't think your NG bet is correct. NG has been moving contrary to basic commodity prices including oil. In fact, NG has lacked correlation to oil for several years now.

If you look at the inventory numbers, relative supply, replinishment rates, and NG demand, I think you'll see NG is going to continue to be a lone wolf. I have no crystal ball, but that's the way I read it currently and certainly, that's the way the market is behaving currently.

EW...good comments, but Bryce is right, GAAP NI is not an appropriate metric to use to measure cash flow, or in this case, dividend coverage. GAAP is 100% accrual-based accounting, while cash flow is just that, inflows/outflows from cash-based activities.

As to NLY, hope you didn't sell your shares expecting a decrease in the 1Q dividend.